Patna High Court
Shibu Kumar @ Shiv Nandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted as the offences under Sections 4(2) and 8 of the POCSO Act are grave and the evidence, including the victim’s statement and medical report, warranted the continuation of custody.
Summary
The petitioner, Shibu Kumar, was arrested on 5 January 2026 in connection with a case alleging that he kidnapped a six‑year‑old boy and sexually assaulted him, recording the act. The prosecution presented the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023 and a medical report supporting the allegation. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he has a clean record, was not named in the FIR, and that the charges are fabricated. The court examined the seriousness of the offences under Sections 4(2) and 8 of the POCSO Act, the corroborative medical evidence, and the risk of tampering with evidence. Concluding that the nature of the crime warranted continued detention, the court refused the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving kidnapping and rape of a minor under the POCSO Act.
Legislation cited
- BNSS, 2023 — s. 183
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 4(2), 8
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- kidnapping
- child sexual abuse
- medical evidence
- serious offence
- court refusal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32729 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-472 Year-2025 Thana- BAKHARI District- Begusarai
======================================================
Shibu Kumar @ Shiv Nandan Kumar S/o Ashok Panti @ Ashok Tanti R/o vill
- Jitpur, P.S.- Bakhri, Distt.- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX W/o Satnudhar Tanti R/o vill - Jitpur, ward no. 7, P.S.- Bakhari, Distt.-
Begusarai
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramakant Yadav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-05-2026 Heard Mr. Ramakant Yadav, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
05.01.2026 in connection with Bakhri P.S. Case No. 472 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 26.12.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 4(2) and 8 of the POCSO Act.
3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner has
kidnapped minor son of the informant aged about 6 years and
committed rape upon him and also recorded the whole incident.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32729 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
2/2
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed
any offence as alleged in the FIR. In fact, the petitioner is not
named in the FIR.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the petitioner has kidnapped the minor son of the
informant and committed wrong with the victim who is 6 years
old and his statement has been recorded under Section 183 of
the BNSS, 2023 in which he has categorically stated that the
petitioner has made physical relation with him. Apart from that
the medical report of the victim also supports the allegation as
alleged in the FIR.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection
with Bakhri P.S. Case No. 472 of 2025 pending in the court of
learned District Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special
Judge, POCSO Act, Begusarai, District- Begusarai.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.